No abstract

No abstract

ObjectiveTo compare results of obese patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) who, after an intensive weight loss regimen, received 1 year of either dietary support (D), a knee-exercise program (E), or “no attention” (C; control group).MethodsWe conducted a randomized, 2-phase, parallel-group trial. A total of 192 obese participants with knee OA were enrolled; the mean age was 62.5 years and 81% were women with a mean entry weight of 103.2 kg. In phase 1, all participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups and began a dietary regimen of 400–810 and 1,250 kcal/day for 16 weeks (2 8-week phases) to achieve a major weight loss. Phase 2 consisted of 52 weeks' maintenance in either group D, E, or C. Outcomes were changes from randomization in pain on a 100-mm visual analog scale, weight, and response according to the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology-Osteoarthritis Research Society International criteria.ResultsMean weight loss for phase 1 was 12.8 kg. After 1 year on maintenance therapy, the D group sustained a lower weight (11.0 kg, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 9.0, 12.8 kg) than those in the E (6.2, 95% CI 4.4, 8.1 kg) and C (8.2, 95% CI 6.4, 10.1 kg) groups (P = 0.002 by analysis of covariance [ANCOVA]). Adherence was low in the E group. All groups had statistically significant pain reduction (D: 6.1; E: 5.6; and C: 5.5 mm) with no difference between groups (P = 0.98 by ANCOVA). In each group 32 (50%), 26 (41%), and 33 (52%) participants responded to treatment in the D, E, and C groups, respectively, with no statistically significant difference in the number of responders (P = 0.41).ConclusionA significant weight reduction with a 1-year maintenance program improves knee OA symptoms irrespective of maintenance program.

BackgroundUndergoing diagnostic evaluation for cancer has been associated with a high prevalence of anxiety and depression and affected health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The aims of this study were to assess HRQoL, anxiety, and depression pre- and post-diagnosis in patients undergoing diagnostic evaluations for cancer due to non-specific symptoms; to examine changes over time in relation to final diagnosis (cancer yes/no); and to assess the predictive value of pre-diagnostic psychological, socio-demographic and clinical factors.MethodsA prospective, multicenter survey study of patients suspected to have cancer based on non-specific symptoms was performed. Participants completed the EORTC-QLQ-C30 quality of life scale, HADS, SOC-13 and self-rated health before and after completing diagnostic evaluations. Intra- and inter-group differences between patients diagnosed with cancer versus patients with non-cancer diagnoses were calculated. The impact of baseline psychological, socio-demographic, and medical factors on HRQoL, anxiety and depression at follow-up was explored by bootstrapped multivariate linear regression analyses and logistic regression analyses.ResultsA total of 838 patients participated in this study; 679 (81 %) completed the follow-up. Twenty-two percent of the patients received a cancer diagnosis at the end of the follow-up. Patients presented initially with a high burden of symptoms and affected role and emotional functioning and global health/QL, irrespective of diagnosis. The prevalence of clinical anxiety prior to knowledge of the diagnosis was 32 % in patients with cancer and 35 % in patients who received a non-cancer diagnosis. HRQoL and anxiety improved after diagnosis, and a larger improvement was seen in patients who received a non-cancer diagnosis. There were no intra- or inter-group differences in the depression scores. The strongest predictors of global QL, anxiety, and depression after a known diagnosis were baseline scores, co-morbidity and poor self-rated health.ConclusionsPatients undergoing diagnostic evaluations for cancer based on non-specific symptoms experience a high prevalence of anxiety and affected quality of life prior to knowledge of the diagnosis. The predictive value of the baseline scores is important when assessing the psychological impact of undergoing diagnostic evaluations for cancer.